Jharkhand Court March 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sri Tirupati Wires Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Jhar66; 2003(51)BLJR758
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by petitioner for direction upon the respondents to accept the deposit of security money amount to Rs. 3,50,832/- in shape of National Saving Certificate (NSC for short) for proposed load of 150 KVA sanctioned to the petitioner vide letter No. 1513/ESE/Giridhi dated 27th September, 2002.2. It is alleged that the respondents have refused to accept such security money in shape of NSC vide their letter No. 1526/ESE/Giridih dated 1st October, 2002 on the ground that there is no circular/guide line issued by the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB for short).3. The main plea taken by the petitioner is that the refusal to accept NSC as security deposit by respondent-JSEB is country to Clause 15.2.13 of the Jharkhand Industrial Policy, 2001. The respondents have opposed to accept security money in shape of NSC on the ground that there is no such policy/guide line issued by the State of Jharkhand of JSEB for grant of fresh electri...
Rameshwaram Apartment Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR773
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by petitioner against the energy bill dated 12th September, 2002 (for the month of August, 2002) raised on the basis of the Commercial mode of tariff.2. According to petitioner, the energy bill in question which relates to the common area of its multistoried apartment (Rameshwaram Apartment) situated at South Office Para, Ranchi, has been wrongly raised by the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB for short) on the basis of 'commercial' mode. It should have been raised on the basis of 'domestic category' of tariff.3. Counsel for the petitioner relied on 1993 Tariff as amended on 14th August, 1996. Reliance was also placed on letter No. 350 dated 11th August, 1994 whereby the relevant amendment made in 1991 Tariff was commanicated. At Clause 1 (F) of the said letter dated 11th August, 1994, the following amendment was shown :'The rates applicable to domestic category of tariff shall also apply for consumption of electrical en...
Mrs. Zaira Nishat Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR501(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J. 1. Inspite of notice to respondents No. 5 to 8, they have not chosen to appear. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 4. 3. This petition is being disposed off at this stage with the consent of parties. 4. The petitioner prayed for a direction on the respondents, particularly the District Superintendent of Education, Chaibasa (respondent No. 4), to consider the petitioner's representation dated 31.8.1999 (Annexure-10), pending before him and to promote her to the post of Head Mistress and for other consequential reliefs. In the counter affidavit the respondents have annexed an office order contained in Memo No. 3561/Chaibasa dated 3.9.2001 passed by District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbum, Chaibasa, whereby he has rejected the said representation of the petitioner (Annexure-10). 5. The short facts of the purpose of disposal of this case are as follows :-- By the order dated 27th Sep...
Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. Vs. Surendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR133(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by appellant-petitioner for review of Order and Judgment dated 16th July, 2002 passed in L.P.A. No. 508 of 1999(R).2. As the petitioner lost before single Judge, in L.P.A. before this Court and also before the Supreme Court in S.L.A. (Civil) No. 21902/2002, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except the relevant one as mentioned hereunder ;The petitioner-Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited (H.E.C. for short) and many other Companies having their factory failed to comply with mandatory provisions of Factories Act and Rules, the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6173/92 (R) noticed that Safety Officers were not appointed in many of the factories. The Court vide order dated 18th March, 1993 directed the petitioner H.E.C. to appoint Safety Officers in terms of Rule 62(b) of the Bihar Factories Rules.Thereafter, in pursuance of advertisement published by petitioner-H.E.C., after due interview and selection following the ...
SamIn Ansari Vs. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR354(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This application has been preferred by petitioner against the order No. Vig/CVO/26(326)/88/ 2000-108, dated 29th May, 2000 whereby and whereunder major penalty of lowering by three stages in the basic pay for a period of three years has been imposed. It has further been ordered that the intervening period from 12th December, 1991 to 4th October, 1998 shall be considered period of 'non-duty'.2. As the matter relating to petitioner practically stands settled in view of earlier decisions/order of this Court and the Supreme Court, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except the relevant one.The petitioner who was a workman under M/s. Hindustan Steel, works Construction Limited (Company, for short) in its Bokaro Steel Plant, was proceeded departmentally for certain allegation.In the Chargesheet, an allegation was made that the petitioner was running a business prejudice to the Company's interest, without permission, which is an act of subversive of discipli...
Sahdeo Sah Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR174(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. This writ has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to release the retiral dues statutory and penal interest thereon to the petitioner.2. Short facts of this case are that the petitioner was a Jan Sevak in Karon Block of Deoghar District He was arrested in connection with a criminal case (which has no concern with any departmental matter) bearing Pirpainti RS. Case No. 127 of 1995 on 1.12.1995. Consequent thereto, the petitioner was suspended w.e.f. 1.12.1995 (Annexure-1). The petitioner was released from jail custody on 16.7.1999 and he joined his office on 17.7.1999. No departmental proceeding was pending against him and thereafter he superannuated on 31.7.1997. The grievance of the petitioner is that during his period of suspension he was not given subsistence allowances consequently his family suffered and even after the retirement, the retiral dues has not been paid to him.3. The respondents appeared and filed counter affidavit on 21.3.2002...
Ashiana Housing and Finance (India) Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and or ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR188(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The only point for consideration in this case is whether the Registrar, Cooperative Society, Jharkhand has Jurisdiction to interfere with the rights and interests of petitioner or not.2. The petitioner has challenged those parts or portions of the impugned orders, whereby its interests have been prejudicially or adversely affected or tend to affect.3. The 5th Respondent. Ispat Nagri Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Mango, Jamshedpur (Society for short) purchased about 16-17 acres of land at a hilly place in the outskirts of Jamshedpur. Initially, it had 20 members. Subsequently, 27 more members were inducted, totaling 47 members altogether.4. According to the petitioner, all members were allotted plots of their choice i.e., site and area. There being no habitation within the vicinity of 3 K.M., lands being hilly and uneven, the 5th Respondent could not attract more members nor could generate funds to develop the lands. After several informal meetings between th...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Builders Enterprises and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2003
Reported in: II(2003)BC432; [2003(2)JCR222(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal filed by the defendant/appellant is directed against the order dated 24.1.1997 passed by Sub-Judge IV at Ranchi in money suit No. 11 of 1993 whereby he has allowed the prayer of the plaintiffs/respondents and granted interim injunction restraining the defendant to proceed with the notice and refer the dispute to the arbitration by appointing Arbitrator.2. It appears that plaintiff/respondent M/s Builders Enterprises being the partnership firm entered into a contract with the defendant/Union of India for the purpose of undertaking construction work. Although plaintiff commenced the construction work but because of some reasons the contract could not be completed. Plaintiffs' case was that because of default on the part of the defendant, the plaintiffs suffered huge loss to the extent of Rs. 8,25,000/-. Consequently, the aforementioned suit was filed by the plaintiff for a decree of Rs. 8,74,500/-. The defendant/ appellant contested the suit by filing written...
Sametri Devi and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2768; [2003(2)JCR192(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for appropriate direction upon the respondents for payment of adequate compensation on account of death of her husbands who have said to have been brutally murdered and the property and belongings were completely damaged by the members of extremists called M.C.C.2. It is contended by the petitioners that they are the young widows of late Deo Narayan Patel and Bishnath Patel of village Banhe P.S. Bachra, District Hazaribagh and they are worst sufferers and victim of the barbarious and brutal acts of the extremists in the locality. Their husbands have been murdered in the prime of theiryouth leaving the petitioners and their valuable articles have been completely burnt and damaged by setting ablage for which two criminal cases have been instituted being Case No. 41/96 and 67/96 under Section 302 and other section of the IPC Petitioners approached several times to the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh and gave their gri...
Bhawani Press Metal and Body Building Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electr ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR278(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J. 1. Heard both sides and perused the writ, counter affidavit and rejoinder.2. The questions to be answered in this writ are :(a) Whether on the expiry of one year of notice to determine the high tension agreement, the agreement ceases to exist and the respondents are duly bound to issue the bills on the basis of low tension tariff, (b) whether respondents are bound to raise the bills from the month of February, 1996 on the basis of low tension tariff especially when the respondents have been all along accepting the bills (c) whether respondents are duty bound to take average consumption on the basis of three months' average when the meter was working properly i.e. March, April and May 1995 or on the basis of three months'average when the new meter may be installed in the premises of the petitioner. 3. Earlier the petitioner vide Annexure-1 and 2 wrote letter to the respondents for conversion of HT agreement into LT agreement. When it was not done, the petitione...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »